The most important mystery of the Moon lies in its origin. We still don't know where the Moon came from. But there are plenty of hypotheses about the origin of the Moon. Let's look at them.
But first
About the Moon
The Earth has only one satellite - the Moon. It moves around the Earth in an orbit at an average distance from it of 376,284 km.
The Earth's gravitational force gradually slows down the rotation of the Moon around its axis, so that now the Moon goes around its entire path around the Earth in exactly the same time as it takes one rotation around its axis. This synchronous rotation means that when we look at the Moon from Earth, we always see only one side of it. Only astronauts and spacecraft have been able to see the far side of the Moon.
As the Moon moves around the Earth, the Sun illuminates different parts of its surface.
Look at the picture. You see on it what the Moon looks like from the same point on the Earth, being at different points of its orbit: crescent moon, half of the lunar disk (first quarter), waxing Moon, full moon, waning Moon, half of the lunar disk (last quarter), lunar sickle.
The Moon is very large relative to the Earth. The diameter of the Moon at the equator (in the middle part) is 3475 km, which is slightly less than a quarter of the diameter of the Earth. Therefore, some astronomers even believe that the Earth-Moon system should be considered as a double planet.
But let us return to the question of the origin of the Moon.
Hypotheses about the origin of the Moon
Hypothesis one
In the early stages of Earth's existence, it had a ring system similar to that of Saturn. Perhaps the Moon was formed from them?
Hypothesis two (centrifugal separation)
When the Earth was still very young and consisted of molten rocks, it rotated so quickly that it stretched out, became shaped like a pear, and then the top of this “pear” broke off and turned into the Moon. This hypothesis is jokingly called the “daughter” hypothesis.
Hypothesis three (collisions)
When the Earth was young, it was hit by some celestial body whose size was half the size of the Earth itself. As a result of this collision, a huge amount of material was thrown into outer space, and subsequently the Moon was formed from it.
Hypothesis four (capture)
The Earth and Moon formed independently, in different parts of the solar system. When the Moon passed close to the Earth's orbit, it was captured by the Earth's gravitational field and became its satellite. This hypothesis is jokingly called the “marital” hypothesis.
Hypothesis five (joint education)
The Earth and the Moon formed simultaneously, in close proximity to each other (jokingly - the “sister” hypothesis).
Hypothesis six (many moons)
Several small moons were captured by the Earth's gravity, then they collided with each other, collapsed, and from their debris the present Moon was formed.
Hypothesis seven (evaporation)
From the molten proto-earth, significant masses of matter were evaporated into space, which then cooled, condensed in orbit and formed the proto-moon.
Each of these hypotheses has its pros and cons. Currently, the collision hypothesis is considered the main and more acceptable one. Let's take a closer look at it.
This hypothesis was proposed by William Hartman and Donald Davis in 1975. According to their assumption, the protoplanet (they called it Theia) about the size of Mars collided with the proto-Earth early in its formation, when the Earth had approximately 90% of its current mass. The blow did not land in the center, but at an angle, almost tangentially. As a result, most of the substance of the impacted object and part of the substance of the earth's mantle were thrown into low-Earth orbit. From these debris, the proto-Moon assembled and began to orbit with a radius of about 60,000 km. As a result of the impact, the Earth received a sharp increase in rotation speed (one revolution in 5 hours) and a noticeable tilt of the rotation axis.
Why is this particular hypothesis about the origin of the Moon considered the main one? It explains well all the known facts about the chemical composition and structure of the Moon, as well as the physical parameters of the Moon-Earth system. Initially, great doubts were raised about the possibility of such a successful collision (oblique impact, low relative speed) of such a large body with the Earth. But then it was suggested that Theia formed in Earth's orbit. This scenario well explains the low impact speed, the impact angle, and the current, almost exactly circular orbit of the Earth.
But this hypothesis also has its vulnerabilities, as, indeed, every hypothesis (after all, HYPOTHESIS translated from ancient Greek means “assumption”).
So, the vulnerability of this hypothesis is as follows: the Moon has a very small iron-nickel core - it makes up only 2-3% of the total mass of the satellite. And the metallic core of the Earth makes up about 30% of the planet’s mass. To explain the iron deficiency on the Moon, we have to accept the assumption that by the time of the collision (4.5 billion years ago) both on Earth and on Theia, a heavy iron core had already been released and a light silicate mantle had formed. But no unambiguous geological evidence for this assumption has been found.
And second: if the Moon had somehow ended up in the Earth’s orbit at such a distant time and after that had not undergone significant shocks, then, according to calculations, a multi-meter layer of dust settling from space would have accumulated on its surface, which was not confirmed during space landings. devices on the lunar surface.
So…
Until the 60s of the 20th century, the main hypotheses of the origin of the Moon were three: centrifugal separation, capture and joint formation. One of the main goals of the American lunar expeditions of 1960-1970 was to find evidence of one of these hypotheses. The first data obtained revealed serious contradictions with all three hypotheses. But during the Apollo flights there was no hypothesis of a giant collision yet. . It is she who is now dominant .
maypa_pa in Where and how the Moon appeared. The first mentions of the Moon.The Moon is the most mysterious object in the solar system. Where and how did the Moon come from? The first mentions of the Moon.
Various ancient myths tell about the arrival of various creatures from the Moon. The clay tablets of the Kheti and the inhabitants of Babylon indicated the arrival of the Moon God; in China and Korea it was indicated that certain golden eggs flew from the Moon, from which the lunar inhabitants emerged. The strangest mention of the Greeks was when a strange creature in a metal skin fell from the moon, which was called the Nemean Lion. According to legend, Hercules himself killed him. In the Egyptian book of Hathor it was said that the Moon is a kind of all-seeing eye that constantly monitors a person.
So where did the Moon actually come from?
What is currently known about the Moon:
The moon has a magnetosphere.
Satellites, as is known, cannot have their own magnetosphere. This means that the Moon was previously a planet, or part of some kind of destroyed one. There are suggestions that the Moon may be part of Phaeton, perhaps even its core. Between Mars and Jupiter there previously existed the planet Phaeton, which was destroyed mysteriously.
The Moon is about 1.5 billion years older than our planet
Taking parts of the Moon's soil, scientists conducted research and found that the Moon is much older than our planet, which seems incredible and crazy. Our science is not yet able to explain this. It is assumed that the Moon was captured by the gravity of the Earth, before which it was an independent planet.
The composition of the Moon is similar to that of Mars.
There is an assumption that the Moon could previously have been a satellite of Mars, since their composition matches perfectly, unlike our planet. According to the theory of Littleton, an English scientist, 2 cosmic bodies made of the same building material should have a mass ratio to each other as 1 to 9. Between the Moon and Mars the ratio is 1 to 9. The law of similarity according to which all planets in the Solar System are located , also confirms this fact.
A time when the Earth did not have a Moon. Legends about the Moon.
In the ancient texts of the peoples of the world it is written where the Earth got this satellite. These writings are the same among different peoples, with minor blots. Everywhere they say the same thing, that before the Earth did not have a Moon and that the Gods brought it after a great catastrophe. (According to Greek legends) When the Moon appeared, a great flood came to Earth. The Chinese and Jews say that when the Moon appeared, long rains and earthquakes enveloped the Earth and that it fell to the north, which signifies the reversal of the magnetic poles. In the Egyptian temple of the goddess Hathor (Hathor), all the walls are painted with a calendar, which indicates all the troubles and disasters of our planet. According to the transcripts, it was possible to find out that the Moon was attracted to our planet by certain Gods. After this, dramatic changes occurred in Egyptian mythology. A new God appears, the one who is responsible for 5 additional days a year (perhaps the appearance of the Moon slowed down our planet and the number of days increased) At the same time, ebbs and flows appeared. The Egyptian God Thoth is also responsible for them.
On the other side of the Earth, ancient people described the appearance of a new celestial body on the walls. Not far from the sacred famine of Teoanak, on the walls of the Kolosasaya temple standing on stones, symbols are inscribed, according to which it is said that more than 12 thousand years ago the Moon appeared near the Earth.
The drawings of the Kopi Indians say that the appearance of the Moon brought unprecedented disasters, the Earth tumbled and swayed. It is written that the planet changed its orbit and changed the speed of rotation around its axis, and the Sun and Moon began to rise from different places.
Different peoples described it slightly differently. For some peoples, the Moon appeared from under water, for others, from under water.
After the flood, in many ancient drawings a certain rabbit appeared, this is how he was depicted, plowing the ground and sowing crops, and it is said that he was helped by a certain mechanical machine.
Before the appearance of the Moon, people lived 10 thousand years.
The ancient chronicles say that people previously lived for 10 thousand years. After the great catastrophe, people began to age faster, and life time changed to 1 thousand years, but later this was lost.
This means that either the year was less, or the conditions were earlier more acceptable for our existence.
The Moon is like an interplanetary spaceship of aliens
There are opinions that the Moon was artificially created and is the spaceship of the Phaetonians, who escaped on it before the destruction of their planet.
Facts that can confirm this:
1.The moon is perfectly round. (no cosmic body has such perfect forms. During an eclipse, the Moon completely covers the Sun, which confirms this fact.)
2.The moon does not rotate. This is very strange. What does the back of the moon hide?
Apollo 11 in 1969, landing on the Moon, was met by a group of UFOs that landed on the other side of the crater. There were 3 objects. Aliens in space suits landed from them. Mission Control forbade astronaut Neil Armstrong to leave the Lunar Module. So he sat for 7 hours. After that, he violated the order and stepped onto the Moon, for which he would later be removed from the space program. Later, all ships of the Apollo program would be accompanied by UFOs. These facts were recorded on film Photo and video.
The planned Apollo program was abruptly interrupted, citing insufficient funding. However, Apollos 17,18,19 were paid for in advance. Why was the program curtailed? What prevented Russia from annexing the Moon to its territory when the United States curtailed it?
The next attempts to fly to the Moon almost all turned out to be unsuccessful. Some unknown force seemed to prevent us from flying there. 
Strange flashes began to be recorded on the Moon; strange objects were repeatedly observed, sometimes reaching a length of 15-20 km. They sank into the lunar craters and then disappeared without a trace. Strange shadows moving across the Moon are recorded almost every day. In the 12th century, chronicles were written that correctly described that some kind of flares were occurring on the Moon.
On the Moon, strange high-frequency sounds are heard from the depths of the Moon, Moonquakes occur, possibly caused by some mechanisms that are located in its depths.
The question of the origin of the Moon, which has the second name Selene*, has worried and excited the minds since time immemorial, and the minds of absolutely everyone. And ordinary people, and, especially, learned men. Where did the Earth get its satellite, the Moon? Many different hypotheses have been put forward on this matter. And they were divided into two sections...
Hypotheses of natural and artificial origin
There are two groups, sections, hypotheses of the origin of the Moon: natural and artificial. So, there are not so few natural hypotheses, and even more artificial ones. This all speaks to the mystique of Selena.
Natural theories of the origin of the Moon
The first theory, the main one, says that the Moon was captured by the Earth's gravitational field. According to the theory of the English astronomer Littleton, during the formation of celestial bodies, planets and satellites from common “building material”, the ratio of the mass of the planet to the satellite should be: 9:1. However, the ratio of the masses of the Earth and the Moon is 81:1, and that of Mars and the Moon is just 9:1! This is where the hypothesis arose that earlier, before the Earth, the Moon was a satellite of Mars. Although in our solar system all bodies are located contrary to the laws by which other star systems were created.
According to the second theory of the natural origin of the Moon, the so-called centrifugal separation hypothesis, put forward in the 19th century. The moon was torn out from the bowels of our planet, from the impact of a large cosmic body in the Pacific Ocean, where a so-called “trace” remained in the form of a depression.
However, the most probable theory among the scientific community is that a large cosmic body, possibly a planet, crashed into the Earth at a speed of several thousand kilometers, hitting a tangent, from which the Earth began to rotate, causing colossal destruction. After such an impact, part of the Earth in the form of debris and dust broke off and flew some distance away. And then, by the force of gravity, it attracted to itself all the fragments that rotated in orbit and, colliding with each other, gradually gathered into one planet over the course of tens of millions of years. Which became a satellite.
Below is a short video of the event...
Description of an event from ancient times
Having spent several years in China studying the ancient Chinese chronicles, Martin Martinus wrote down what happened before the flood and how it all happened: “The support of the sky collapsed. The earth was shaken to its very foundation. The sky began to fall to the north. The sun and stars changed the direction of their movement. The entire system of the Universe has fallen into disarray. The sun was in an eclipse, and the planets turned out of their way.”
It turns out that the Earth’s orbit changed and began to move away from the Sun.
What happened?
Apparently, the Earth collided with a comet, the trajectory of which intersected with the Earth's orbit. Why a comet and not an asteroid or planet? Yes, because geological research suggests that in prehistoric times the sea level was much lower than it is today. And as you know, a comet consists of ice that melted and replenished the waters of the world’s oceans.
Great doubt about all versions associated with the collision and the formation of the Moon from fragments ejected by the explosion during the collision was raised by the experiment of specialists from the University of Colorado led by Robin Kenap, who tried to simulate this cataclysm for several years on a computer. And at the beginning of the experiment, at the end it turned out that not one satellite was spinning around the Earth, but a whole swarm of small satellites. And only by significantly complicating the model and clarifying the description of the processes taking place, scientists still managed to achieve the fact that only one natural satellite was formed near the Earth. Which was then immediately adopted by supporters of the emergence of the Moon after a collision of the planet with some body.
In 1998, the scientific community was stunned by the discovery of huge amounts of ice in shadowed areas near the lunar poles. This discovery was made on the American Lunar Prospector spacecraft. In addition, when rotating around the Moon, the device experienced minor changes in speed. Calculations based on these indicators revealed the presence of a core on the Moon. Mathematically, scientists have determined its radius. In their opinion, the radius of the core should be from 220 to 450 km, with the radius of the Moon being 1738 km. This indicator was obtained based on the premise that the Moon's core consists of the same materials as the Earth's core.Using Lunar Prospector magnetometers, scientists discovered a weak magnetic field on the Moon. Thanks to which they were able to clarify the radius of the lunar core, which is 300 --- 425 km. 31 soil samples were also delivered to Earth, the study of which showed that the isotope content in lunar soil samples is completely identical to terrestrial samples. According to Uwe Wichert: “We already knew that the Earth and the Moon have very similar isotope complexes, but we did not expect that they were exactly the same.”
Hence, a number of hypotheses were put forward that the formation of the Moon occurred from an impact with another cosmic body.
The author of the following theory is the well-known Kant, according to whom the Moon was formed together with the Earth from cosmic dust. However, it turned out to be untenable. Due to the discrepancy with the laws of space mechanics, according to which the ratio of the masses of the planet and the satellite should be 9:1, and not 81:1 like the Earth and the Moon. However, it is not only the Moon that contradicts the laws of cosmic mechanics, but the entire solar system.
However, before this we only considered official versions. Or rather natural ones, the turn has come to the unnatural, artificial appearance of the Moon. Which negates all the discoveries mentioned above in this article. It turns out that the astronauts from the Lunar Prospector made such a gross mistake, or did the authorities mislead the whole world? I can’t say anything about this; I haven’t been to the moon myself. It is better to consider other hypotheses.
Artificial theories of the origin of the Moon
Folk legends
Proponents of the disaster believe that the events of this disaster occurred 4.5 billion years ago. However, some facts, traditions and legends tell a different story. Many people associate the word legend as something that was invented, but in reality there was no such thing. But Troy was once considered a fiction, a legend. But it turned out to be a story, a true story. Legends often, as experience shows, are based on actually occurring events.
The legends of various peoples claim that before the flood there was no moon in the sky. In the legends of the ancient Mayans, the sky was illuminated by Venus, but not by the Moon. Bushmen myths also claim that the Moon appeared in the sky after the Great Flood. About the same in the 3rd century BC. wrote Apollonius of Rhodes, who was the caretaker of the Library of Alexandria. In connection with this, I had the opportunity to use ancient manuscripts and texts that have not reached us.
Proponents of the theory of the artificial origin of the Moon say that this satellite is alien to our planet.
Today there are still questions to the natural theory. Namely, from soil taken from the lunar surface, it was established that the surface is composed of rocks rich in titanium. And the thickness of these rocks is 68 kilometers. It turns out that our researchers are mistaken about the thickness or there is emptiness under the rock. This is where the theories about the hollow moon come from.
Moon spaceship?
The hollow moon theory also supports the spacecraft theory. Moreover, the surface of the “queen of the night” is a mixture of cosmic dust and rock fragments (scientifically this is called regolith). As we know, there is no atmosphere on our satellite and therefore temperature differences on the surface reach 300 degrees Celsius. So, this very regolith is an excellent insulator! Already at a depth of several meters the temperature is constant, although negative if you do not heat it. Which also played a role in putting forward the version about the spaceship.
Alien base
One researcher George Leonard believed that the Moon was an intermediate raw material and fuel base for aliens. And after a collision with a comet, this base required repairs, for which it was towed into Earth orbit.
The fact that the lunar program was suddenly curtailed also plays into favor of the theory that there is someone or something there, even if not a spaceship, that frightened off all the researchers. It is possible to explore an object and then suddenly completely lose interest in it only if you have comprehensive information about it. What don't we know about her? After all, all the discoveries would immediately be trumpeted from all sides. Or when faced with the impossibility of studying. Since scientific and technological progress is always moving forward, it becomes obvious that obstacles do not arise due to technical deficiencies. And most likely someone warned you! Or saw something!
We are already accustomed to seeing the Moon in the sky. Most people believe that it has existed since the appearance of the Earth as our constant satellite, but the opinion of scientists, as well as some facts, make us think about this theory?
Was the Moon really always there as our natural satellite, or maybe it appeared later? Maybe it was even built?
I first read about the theory of an artificial moon as a child in the magazine “Science and Life”. When the Internet appeared, it became easier. This theory was developed and “coolly” substantiated many times by our Soviet scientists.
In 1968, an article appeared in the newspaper "Komsomolskaya Pravda", then in the magazine "Soviet Union", then a very serious study and scientific book by M.V. Vasiliev "Vectors of the Future" (Moscow, 1971). Works of scientists Khvastunov and Shcherbakov, a series of articles in Science and Life. In general, this was a very serious theory, which only slightly fell short of official recognition in the USSR and among the Americans.
So, in 1969, before the first astronaut Neil Armstrong landed on the Moon, used fuel tanks from unmanned spacecraft carrying out reconnaissance flights were dropped onto its surface. A seismograph was also left here then. Soon this device began transmitting information about vibrations of the lunar crust to Houston.
It turned out that the impact of a 12-ton load on the surface of our satellite caused a local “moonquake”. Many astrophysicists have suggested that beneath the rocky surface there was a metallic shell surrounding the Moon's core. Analyzing the speed of propagation of seismic waves in this supposedly metallic shell, scientists calculated that its upper boundary is located at a depth of about 70 kilometers, and the shell itself is approximately the same thickness.
Then one of the astrophysicists argued that inside the Moon there could be a huge, almost empty space with a volume of 73.5 million cubic kilometers.
This is how scientific facts emerged that the Moon is hollow. But what is even more interesting is that there is a lot of evidence and photographs of the mechanisms on the Moon that keep it running. Careful checks of these photographs have repeatedly confirmed their authenticity.
And this is only official science! And there is also theosophy, occult sciences...
If we look at how the Moon was depicted in ancient times, the mysteries will only increase. The Moon was depicted empty with the Gods inside it. I doubt that at that time people had any idea what a spaceship was, and therefore they depicted it as they understood it within the framework of their ideas about the world.
Based on the available information, it can be argued that there were catastrophes on a planetary scale in the solar system, one of which “rebuilt” the solar system.
Perhaps Venus lost its satellite Mercury, and the Earth gained something? For example, the Moon?
After all, judging by the surviving data, before the great flood (which could have occurred just after a planetary catastrophe), there was no Moon in the sky in ancient times!
But if the Moon is not an artificial body, then how can the following facts be explained:
1. The incredible curvature of the moon's surface
2. Lunar craters are no deeper than 4 km, although the impact force of meteorites should have reached up to 50 km, which means the surface is very durable.
3. Geographic asymmetry. Location of the "lunar seas". 80% of them are on the visible side of the Moon while the "dark" side of the Moon has many more craters, mountains and landforms.
4. Gravity on the surface of the moon is not uniform
5. The density of our satellite is 60% of the density of the Earth. This fact, together with various studies, proves that the Moon is a hollow object.
The question arises. If the Moon is artificial, then why was it built?
All distances between planets in our solar system obey the Titius-Bode rule and are calculated using the formula that results in the following table:
It turns out that according to the formula there should be another planet after Mars, but in fact it is not there, but only the asteroid belt. This is how a very plausible theory emerged about the planet Phaeton, which once existed between Mars and Jupiter, but was then destroyed as a result of a tragedy on a cosmic scale.
Probably once there was a strong collision between a planet (I will conventionally call it a phaeton) and another cosmic body, as a result of which only an asteroid belt remained of the planet, its closest neighbor, Mars, lost its atmosphere (Scientists have come to the conclusion that Mars was once warm, humid and oxygen planet) and “frozen” (on Mars in ancient times there was water suitable for living organisms, and even now water has also been discovered)
In the textbook, in the section “formation of solar systems,” it says:
“Obviously, during a space disaster, which occurred as a result of the collision of two large cosmic bodies, a huge amount of debris was formed, scattering from the site of the disaster in different directions. Apparently, the planets at that time were located in orbit in such a way that Saturn was closest to the site of the disaster, which took on most of the debris. At the same time, Jupiter and Uranus also got something (depending on their position in orbit at that time).”
The Earth probably suffered too, given that it is located in front of Mars. Is this why there was a worldwide flood about which legends are made? You may not believe what is written in the Bible, but it turns out that references to the great flood are found in many cultures. Including, according to the research of J. J. Frazer, traces of legends with a similar plot were found in: Babylonia, Palestine, Syria, Armenia, Phrygia, India, Burma, Vietnam, China, Australia, Indonesia, the Philippines, the Andaman Islands, Taiwan, Kamchatka , New Guinea, the islands of Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia. People in different places, even those people who have never seen the ocean in their lives, preserve stories from generation to generation that talk about the Great Flood. What is this? Is it really a coincidence?
But there is also scientific and geological evidence of this event. Geology Ph.D. Terry Mortenson says:
1. We see fossils of sea animals on the highest mountains. In the Himalayas, in the Andes, in the rocky mountains. There are shell imprints everywhere. How did they get there? And how did they end up on the tops of the highest mountains?
2. Massive sedimentary deposits. We see this especially clearly in the Grand Canyon of the western United States. We see these sedimentary deposits all over the face of the earth. They are very thick, vast and sometimes stretch over tens of thousands of square kilometers. All this indicates that precipitation fell over a very large area at one time.
3. We see erosion in certain layers of the soil, which was much more intense than now. We see traces of erosion all over the surface of the earth. Cliffs, valleys. However, when we look at the layers of geological rocks, they look like a stack of pancakes. There are no traces of erosion between these layers...
In other words, there was a flood and it is quite possible that it was caused by the catastrophe that destroyed Phaeton. But even if we can prove one hundred percent that the Moon was made artificially, we will not answer the question: “Why was it necessary to make such a grandiose structure?” But you can think about this topic!
Let's consider the most possible options for the appearance of the Moon:
1) It was originally formed with the Earth. But if the Moon and Earth were formed together, simultaneously with the entire solar system, the Moon, like the Earth, should have more of an iron core;
2) This is one of the fragments of the destroyed planet, which was “pulled” by the Earth, but Earth’s gravity is not capable of attracting and holding such a large body as that of the Moon. Or the Earth collided at an angle of 23 degrees with something comparable in size to Mars. One way or another, as a result of the collision, we got the Moon. However, in some incomprehensible way it became hollow;
3) Using the principle of analogy, wheel balancing comes to mind. Let’s say you have new rims on your wheels that are perfectly balanced, but then there’s a hole in your way! Impact and now we have a bent disk whose center of gravity is shifted. Even for a wheel (14 inches), the imbalance is only 20 grams at a car speed of 100 km/h, in terms of loads it is equivalent to the blows of a sledgehammer weighing 3 kg hitting the wheel (taken from auto repair manuals), and then what can we say about the planet?
To level the center of gravity of the wheel, a special weight made of lead or zinc is used, which is attached to the wheel, adding weight.
Why not use the same principle to balance the motion of planets?
A catastrophe occurred, the orbits of some planets shifted. To align the orbits, Mercury was removed from Venus, and the Moon was added to Earth in the same way as wheel balancing is done, but only on a cosmic scale.
Someone (and therefore this someone exists and is clearly superior to people in technology and intelligence) specially selected its weight and placed it exactly where it is needed for the normal movement of the Earth, because as soon as the Moon is removed, the Earth will begin to rotate in arbitrary planes, it will lose stability, and its orbit will probably shift.
Someone specially built the Moon as a “weight” to align the Earth’s orbit and, moreover, still controls its position (so that nothing goes astray), keeps it from rotating (the Moon is always turned with one side towards the Earth), etc.
You can find many documentary videos on the Internet about the constant flights of UFOs both on the Moon itself and in various directions from and to the Moon
Someone constantly flies away from the Moon, then flies to it, flying inside the craters. Unknown structures and structures discovered on our satellite are more reminiscent of mechanical parts than natural formations.
There is another theory (supposedly coming from the Aryan Vedas), that at one time the Earth had three satellites, but then because of the war, two were blown up and only the Moon remained, as we know it. This version is widely discussed on the Internet. Supporters of this version would like to say the following:
1) You should always check your sources of information. If the Bible can still be referred to as a historical document that was written quite a long time ago, but when the Vedas were written is unknown. In general, the very existence of the Aryan Vedas is a mysterious thing, and the source is, to put it mildly, doubtful. First published by the leader of the Old Believers sect A. Khinevich in 1990 and translated by him personally from a language that only he knows. Subsequently, Trekhlebov and the well-known guru of mysticism Levashov joined here.
2) The explosion of a satellite like the Moon in close proximity to the planet should, in theory, cause much worse consequences than a global flood
3) where are the fragments from the exploded 2 Moons flying in space? Or were they all pulled in by the Earth?
Well, which version do you like better?
9 April 2015, 21:58We have already become accustomed to our only natural satellite, which tirelessly circles our planet every 28 days. The moon dominates our night sky, and since ancient times it has touched people's most poetic chords. Although new understandings of many lunar mysteries have been proposed over the past few decades, many unresolved questions still surround our only natural satellite.
Compared to other planets in our solar system, both the orbital path and size of our Moon are quite significant anomalies. Other planets, of course, also have satellites. But planets with weak gravitational influences, such as Mercury, Venus and Pluto, do not have them. The Moon is one quarter the size of the Earth. Compare this to the huge Jupiter or Saturn, which have several relatively small moons (Jupiter's moon is 1/80 its size), and our Moon seems to be a fairly rare cosmic phenomenon.
Another interesting detail: the distance from the Moon to the Earth is quite small, and in apparent size the Moon is equal to our Sun. This curious coincidence is most obvious during total solar eclipses, when the Moon completely obscures our nearest star.
Finally, the Moon's almost perfect circular orbit differs from the orbits of other satellites, which tend to be elliptical.
The gravitational center of the Moon is almost 1,800 m closer to the Earth than its geometric center. With such significant discrepancies, scientists still cannot explain how the Moon manages to maintain its almost perfectly circular orbit.
The gravitational attraction on the Moon is not uniform. The crew aboard Apollo VIII, while flying near the lunar ocean, noticed that the Moon's gravity had sharp anomalies. In some places, gravity seems to mysteriously increase.
The problem of the origin of the Moon has been discussed in the scientific literature for more than a hundred years. Its solution is of great importance for understanding the early history of the Earth, the mechanisms of formation of the Solar system, and the origin of life.
First a logical explanation for the origin of the Moon was put forward in the 19th century. George Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin, the author of the theory of natural selection, was a famous and authoritative astronomer who carefully studied the Moon and in 1878 came up with the so-called separation theory. Apparently, George Darwin was the first astronomer to establish that the Moon was moving away from the Earth. Based on the speed of divergence of the two celestial bodies, J. Darwin suggested that the Earth and the Moon once formed a single whole. In the distant past, this molten viscous sphere rotated very quickly around its axis, making one full revolution in about five and a half hours.
Darwin suggested that the tidal influence of the Sun subsequently caused the so-called separation: a piece of molten Earth the size of the Moon separated from the main mass and eventually took its position in orbit. This theory looked quite reasonable and became dominant at the beginning of the 20th century. It only came under serious attack in the 1920s, when British astronomer Harold Jeffreys showed that the viscosity of the Earth in a semi-molten state would prevent vibrations strong enough to cause the two celestial bodies to separate.
Second theory, which once convinced a number of specialists, was called the accretion theory. It said that a disk of dense particles, reminiscent of the rings of Saturn, gradually accumulated around the already formed Earth. It was assumed that particles from this disk eventually came together to form the Moon.
There are several reasons why this explanation may not be satisfactory. One of the main ones is the angular momentum of the Earth-Moon system, which would never have become what it is if the Moon had formed from an accretion disk. There are also difficulties associated with the formation of oceans of molten magma on the “newborn” Moon.
Third theory about the origin of the Moon appeared around the time when the first lunar probes were launched; it is called the holistic capture theory. It was assumed that the Moon arose far from the Earth and became a wandering celestial body, which was simply captured by Earth's gravity and entered orbit around the Earth.
Now this theory has also fallen out of fashion for several reasons. The ratio of oxygen isotopes in rocks on Earth and the Moon strongly suggests that they formed at the same distance from the Sun, which could not have been the case if the Moon had formed elsewhere. There are also insurmountable difficulties in trying to construct a model in which a celestial body the size of the Moon could enter a stationary orbit around the Earth. Such a huge object could not carefully “float” to Earth at low speed, like a supertanker mooring to a pier; it almost inevitably had to crash into the Earth at high speed or fly next to it and rush on.
By the mid-1970s, all previous theories of the formation of the Moon had encountered difficulties for one reason or another. This created the almost unthinkable situation where renowned experts could publicly admit that they simply did not know how or why the Moon ended up where it did.
From this uncertainty was born new theory, which is now generally accepted, despite some serious issues. It is known as the "big impact" theory.
The idea originated in the Soviet Union in the 60s. from the Russian scientist B.C. Savronov, who considered the possibility of the emergence of planets from millions of asteroids of different sizes, called planetsimals.
In an independent study, Hartmann and his colleague D.R. Davis suggested that the Moon was formed as a result of the collision of two planetary bodies, one of which was the Earth, and the other was a wandering planet, not inferior in size to Mars. Hartmann and Davis believed that the two planets collided in a specific way, resulting in ejections of material from the mantle of both celestial bodies. This material was thrown into orbit, where it gradually combined and became denser to form the Moon.
New information obtained through detailed study of samples from the Moon has almost confirmed the collision theory: 4.57 billion years ago, the protoplanet Earth (Gaia) collided with the protoplanet Theia. The blow did not land in the center, but at an angle (almost tangentially). As a result, most of the substance of the impacted object and part of the substance of the earth's mantle were thrown into low-Earth orbit.
From these debris, the proto-Moon assembled and began to orbit with a radius of about 60,000 km. As a result of the impact, the Earth received a sharp increase in rotation speed (one revolution in 5 hours) and a noticeable tilt of the rotation axis.
In two new studies published in the latest issue of the journal Nature, scientists provide evidence that the chemical similarities between the Earth and the Moon are due to extensive mixing of material formed when the Earth collides with another planet.
Thus, supporters of the main theory of the origin of the earth’s satellite received new confirmation of their correctness, and quite significant ones at that. But, German scientists argue that other theories cannot simply be written off, since new data, although they seriously confirm the main theory, are still not one hundred percent. Therefore, there is still an opportunity to choose for yourself the closest theory of all existing ones, or even come up with a new one!